EDITORIAL

The Plunder of Cultural Heritage and Imperialist Hegemon

The removal of cultural heritage, the tangible carrier of civilizations built by humanity over generations, from its places of origin is not merely a crime, but one of the most striking manifestations of injustice in the international system. The theft and transfer of cultural assets to distant centers acquired a systematic character, particularly during the colonial period. Conducted under the rhetoric of “discovery,” “protection,” and “science,” this process in reality constituted the cultural dimension of imperial domination. Such plunder represents not only a physical displacement but also a rewriting of history itself. By severing the oppressed world from its own past, a Western-centric historical narrative has been constructed, along with the fallacy of “civilizational superiority.” 
Today, museums in Western capitals house hundreds of thousands of artifacts removed from Asia, Africa, South America, and other parts of the world. At the same time, a significant portion of cultural objects looted from the developing world circulates through auction houses at exorbitant prices or remains in private collections. With the expansion of the global art market, these flows have become increasingly complex, giving rise to multi-layered trafficking networks extending from local excavations to international galleries. Within this chain, artifacts are laundered into the legal market through fabricated provenance records.
In the post–Cold War period, and especially over the past two decades, the looting of cultural heritage has gained renewed momentum. The U.S. invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, along with the post-2011 operations aimed at fragmenting Syria, have clearly demonstrated the devastating impact of imperial interventions on cultural assets. In conditions of political instability and armed conflict, the increase in illicit excavations not only feeds global markets but also provides a significant source of financing for terrorist organizations and organized crime networks. Available estimates suggest that the annual scale of this illicit trade ranges from hundreds of millions to several billion dollars.
In this context, the protection and restitution of cultural property are not merely matters of cultural policy for developing countries, but also of sovereignty and historical justice. Restitution processes go beyond symbolic acts of redress and are critical for rebuilding trust within the international system. However, existing legal frameworks and international conventions remain insufficient.
Ultimately, the looting of cultural heritage constitutes a threat to the shared memory of humanity. It must therefore be addressed not as the responsibility of individual states alone, but as a collective responsibility of all countries. At the same time, given that this plunder disproportionately targets the developing world while the artifacts are largely concentrated in imperial centers, cooperation among developing countries will be decisive in strengthening this struggle. Efforts to protect and reclaim cultural property are not only about preserving the past, but also about contributing to the construction of a more just, balanced, and multilateral international order.

 

FİKRET AKFIRAT
Editor-in-Chief

Download
BRIQ Vol.7 Issue:3

Contents

Abstract

Jason Morgan (PhD, Japanese history) is an Associate Professor in the Faculty of Global Studies at Reitaku University in Kashiwa, Japan. His books include Law and Society in Imperial Japan: Suehiro Izutaro and the Search for Equity (Cambria, 2020), Information Regimes during the Cold War in East Asia (Ed.) (Routledge, 2020), Japan in the 1960s: Ten Years of Turning Points (Ed. with Robert Eldridge) (Routledge, 2024), Comfort Women and Sex in the Battle Zone (trans. of Hata Ikuhiko’s Ianfu to senjō no sei) (Hamilton Books, 2018), and The Comfort Women Hoax (with J. Mark Ramseyer) (Encounter, 2024). Morgan’s essays have appeared in Histories, Kervan, Lo Sguardo, Dao, Strategic Analysis, and East Asian Journal of Philosophy. He studies the legal, social, and political history of Japan and East Asia.

Abstract

“The primary method employed by our Ministry to secure the return of cultural property illegally removed from the country is to negotiate with the relevant foreign country and institutions and establish constructive relationships by presenting additional evidence obtained over time. Firstly, it is important to note that in so-called ‘market countries’ such as those in Europe, North America, East Asia, and the Gulf states, possessing, purchasing, and selling items classified as cultural property or cultural heritage is permitted, and collections are not subject to strict oversight unless a criminal investigation is underway. However, the current situation arising from international treaties, such as UNIDROIT, and principles, such as the UNESCO Code of Ethics for the Art Market, may encourage those involved in buying and selling to conduct more thorough provenance research  to protect their reputations and avoid potential legal liabilities.”

Abstract

International agreements are important instruments for preventing the illicit trade of cultural property and in strengthening cross-border cooperation to address this global challenge effectively. However, asymmetrical power dynamics between culturally rich nations and market-oriented countries are sometimes evident in certain provisions of these agreements. The agreement between Türkiye and Switzerland on the prevention of the illicit import and the repatriation of cultural property traces this asymmetry. Although certain imbalances in bilateral international agreements suggest that the interests of market-oriented countries are prioritized at the expense of culturally rich nations, this does not imply that the agreements are entirely ineffective in combating illicit trade in cultural property. This study examines the rise in illicit cultural property trade, the actors combating it at national and international levels, and highlights the role of international agreements in this context. Subsequently, the general framework of the agreement between Türkiye and Switzerland will be analyzed, along with the measures it contains to combat illicit trade and facilitate repatriation. Under the Agreement, Türkiye is expected to submit the largest number of repatriation claims. The final part of the study discusses the asymmetrical aspects of the Agreement that may hinder the effective repatriation of cultural property that was illegally imported into Switzerland from Türkiye.
 

Abstract

Over the past two decades, China has made substantial progress in safeguarding intangible cultural heritage (ICH) through legislative measures, institutional coordination, technological innovation, and academic engagement. Key achievements include establishing a comprehensive legal and policy framework, developing a multi-level inventory system, cultivating representative heritage bearers, promoting community-based safeguarding practices, and expanding international exchange and cooperation. Despite these advances, China’s ICH safeguarding efforts continue to face structural challenges, including pressures on intergenerational transmission arising from rapid modernization, regional disparities in safeguarding capacity, tensions between commercialization and cultural authenticity, and constraints in shaping international discourse on ICH governance. This paper argues that future efforts should focus on refining legal and regulatory frameworks under government leadership, strengthening inter-regional coordination mechanisms, and exploring sustainable models that integrate cultural heritage with tourism and local development. By systematically analyzing China’s practical experience through policy analysis and case studies, this study seeks to provide transferable insights for countries participating in the Belt and Road Initiative, particularly in cultural governance, heritage sustainability, and intercultural dialogue, thereby contributing to the safeguarding of global cultural diversity.
 

Abstract

“What has been entrusted to us? These are the intrinsic values rooted in this land that must be passed down from the past to the future, as they have shaped our present. They could be a major archaeological site, such as Ephesus, or a shrine in any region. They could also be traces of past events in the region. At the very least, they must be documented and passed on to future generations. However, we must not impose our current perspective or problems onto the past. We must not politicise the past. Science is not the monopoly of any single person. Recognise that the past belongs to no one, and that concentrating knowledge in one person is wrong. We must view it as humanity’s shared knowledge and establish collaborations based on knowledge itself, not on ‘you and me’.”

Abstract

“If we remember that our movement truly has a slogan: ‘new Scythians’, the Scythian gold within each of us—then I think it will be much easier to defend this gold while we understand that it should heal us, heal our peoples, strengthen our peoples, the peoples of Russia, the Slavs, the Turks, the Ukrainians, the Caucasians, all those peoples who believe they descend from the Scythians. We must remember who we are, remember, as Alexander Blok, our great Russian poet, said, ‘Yes, Scythian and we,’ that we all descend from this unique civilization. When we remember this, this gold will not disappear from us, and we will cling to it so tightly and cherish it so much that no one will steal it from us.”

Abstract

Mongolia, as a landlocked state committed to permanent neutrality, has strategically transformed its Third Neighbor Diplomacy policy into a mechanism for institutional balancing within the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO). This article contends that Mongolia’s engagement is motivated by a dual logic of hedging and leveraging: it aims to reduce strategic and economic dependence on China and Russia while utilizing the SCO platform to enhance the value of its geographic location and resource endowments. Through selective participation, agenda reframing, and institutional nesting, Mongolia actively shapes its observer status to maximize autonomy and influence. The study concludes that Mongolia’s calculated and innovative approach provides a compelling model for how secondary states can convert multilateral institutions into strategic assets, thereby advancing both the theory of institutional balancing and the practice of small-state diplomacy in contested regions.
 

Abstract

Arduino, A. (2018). China’s Private Army: Protecting the New Silk Road. Singapore: Palgrave Pivot.